Six and a half years. Six and a half years and we are still here. Six and a half years and we are as strong as ever. We have kept our heads while all around are losing theirs. No compromise. No trade-offs. No dealing with the devil.

May I say you look in pretty good shape. Much better shape than Gunns.

All that taxpayers’ money that has kept Gunns in clover in years past is drying up. Their share price is down the toilet. Cash flow assets sold off. Sawmills closed. Workers discarded. Managed Investment Schemes collapsed. In debt to ANZ to the tune of $650 million.

Gunns have no money, no pulp mill and no idea.

As Kim Booth has often said, theirs is a failed business model.

The sooner they leave Tasmania the better. Their dream, with the connivance of an incompetent and ignorant parliament, was to make of Tasmania some sort of Borneo of the southern seas.

They have failed because the people of Tasmania were onto them. The people of Tasmania have a much better vision for the future of this state. That vision does not include converting our First World economy into a Third World one.

In desperation Gunns ran a poll recently. Instead of wasting money on a poll Gunns should be paying their bills. For a starter they owe us, the people of Tasmania, 35 million dollars for logs. Pay up.

Let me reveal the results of another poll that Gunns has been running for a very long time now. Gunns don’t want to be reminded of the results of this poll. Neither does parliament nor the Launceston Chamber of Commerce nor a bunch of other sleepwalkers in Tasmania.

For years Gunns has been polling ever major bank, investment house and pulp mill company in the world. The results are in. The level of support for Gunns and their pulp mill nightmare around the world is precisely zero.

Not one single cent of investment money has been forthcoming for this project in six and a half years. That should tell you something about how economically viable the whole world regards this mill. Will someone wake up the Labor and Liberal parties and the various Chambers of Commerce and let them know?

“Black is the colour and none is the number.” The flags and the choice of black as the colour of the rally are to signify those dark days in March 2007 when the great betrayal of our democracy took place.

That was when the Pulp Mill Assessment Act, the ‘fast track’ assessment, was rubber stamped through both houses of parliament by Labor and Liberal. The only dissent was from the four Greens in the lower house and a handful of honourable independents in the upper.

Let’s be absolutely clear as to what happened back in March 2007. The legislation obscenely favours Gunns. There’s a reason for that. They wrote it. They have never denied it. The bill was escorted through the corridors, toilets, bar, and chambers of Parliament by a squad of lobbyists, lawyers and heavies from Gunns, the CFMEU and the logging industry.

It was tantamount to a coup d’etat.

I, and hundreds of others, saw them gathered on the steps of Parliament on that beautiful late summer day in March 2007. It was their building. They owned the parliament and scripted and directed what took place inside.

That Labor and Liberal politicians and their fellow travellers in the upper house were the willing patsies of this gross abuse of parliamentary democracy should never be excused or diminished in any way.

It was one of the most shameful episodes, perhaps THE most shameful episode, in our political history. It demonstrated a breathtaking contempt for the institution of parliamentary democracy by the very parliamentarians whose sacred duty it was to uphold.

The great irony is that it was all for nothing. There is no pulp mill. Not a single cent of investment money has been attracted to the project in six and half years. It remains, as it always was, a grand delusion. Yet unprincipled government has wasted vast sums of public money on it, money that should have been allocated to health, education, policing, aged care etc.

The pulp mill is over. The nightmare of an uncompetitive, world scale resource gobbling industry for an island that is not world scale, has held Tasmania back for six and a half years.

Let us get on with what we do best in Tasmania, establishing innovative, creative small to medium business directed at the quality end of the market.

The pulp mill has already destroyed two premiers. As sure as night follows day it will destroy a third unless she cuts herself free from the mill insanity and embraces and articulates a positive vision for Tasmania.

How will there be peace?

This war that we have been engaged in for nearly 7 years now will only cease on the part of the people, the excluded community gathered here today, whenever it shall have ceased on the part of those who began it.

When Gunns accepts that they have failed and when the Tasmanian parliament accepts that it has lost and was wrong to ride roughshod over the rights and the best interests of Tasmanians, only then will this war be over.

Amazing scenes as year seven of this debacle continues to haunt, taunt, load with friction and grind Tasmania to a halt.

Hindsight is a valuable and impossible tool, but those unfortunates clutching the remaining parcels of Gunns shares must be wishing that they could have used it in 2005 to forever squash the fatally flawed pulp mill paradigm.

Indeed our government may well be wishing they had access to this tool as they face their own collapse due to blatant mismanagement.

It’s a pity for our state that we are led by supreme incompetence through a constantly shifting team of bunglers who have created a state of suspension through ignorance of the people and many the visionaries who have been scoffed and vilified by self serving politicians and businessmen.

Imagine for a moment if in 2005, Gunns had come through the front door to the people with a solid business plan to create employment in rural Tasmania by creating low volume high return selective logging, while ceasing the cleafell, slash and burn woodchipping lunacy that has forever changed this island, both physically and culturally.

Imagine if they had come with a plan to vertically integrate their business by establishing factories where exquisite timber could become fine furniture, where waste timber could be made into board and veneered to be made into flat pack furniture under the “clean green” label…a Tasmanian IKEA if you like.

Imagine the skills, the waste less processes that could have created jobs in rural and remote areas, the linking of communities and unification of state.

Perhaps a scale relative pulp mill using systems that truly reflect our islands’ clean green mantra and pristine image would have been part of this plan.

Couple that to a paper processing plant, wholesale/retail/distribution outlet and we could have had it all.

What went wrong?

As Peter Cundall has correctly pointed out umpteen times… “GREED”.

Greed from Gunns and government have consumed logic, empathy and love of place and people.

My words above were part of a dream, a dream to combine our materialistic needs while ensuring the very best for our environment.

Aside from my vision for our forest industry, imagine what could have been created by those who have shelved plans of investment and expansion both in the Tamar Valley and across our State over the last six and a half years.

How many unique, sustainable businesses would have been established and thriving even without the support of millions of public dollars fed into the pulp mill money gobbling apparition?

Water will find its own level and our state will thrive because of people like Bob and those who support these rallies, showing the world that the people care even when our government and big business are lost in the wilderness.

When this crazed pulp mill notion is truly gone and when our government is brought to account, we as a state will grow and although we will never recover those lost years, perhaps hindsight will remain fixed in our consciousness, and we will never venture down this path to nowhere again.

Posted by Dave Groves on 16/05/11 at 06:02 AM

A huge thanks to Bob, and John, and Ann, and Lucy, and all the thousand of folks who worked over the years in keeping this going. Its the most sustained, thoughtful, informed and idealistic campaign ever in Tasmanian history, a final standing up to the powerful oligarchies that have run, and ruined, this state for ever. Everything has its place - hydro dams, forest harvesting, but when distorted by corruption and greed, they became ruinous and out of control. They kept us poor, bogan and sick. The Borneo of the southern Ocean, what a sad analogy. Two beautiful and matchless places torn to pieces for the rubbish of the consumer world.

This movement, the New Tasmania movement as its coming to be called, uniting everything we care about - health, creativity, diversity, clean water, air soil, wild forests, healthy oceans and good education, a just and representative government, a unique and sustainable place to survive the coming centuries, and contribute to the wider world. This is a very positive movement. Its a declaration of LIFE against the forces of death. Its waking up to a purpose for existing that is more than the feedlot existence that is expected of us. To fight for the future of our grandchildren and the human race is the greatest purpose there is. It’s selflessness lifts your spirit, and its unity gives it a deep and hidden strength.

March on everyone. You are part of history.

Posted by Anne Cadwallader on 16/05/11 at 06:49 AM

Excellent piece.Bang on the filthy luker.

Posted by Philip Lowe on 16/05/11 at 07:26 AM

Yes, congratulations Bob. A wonderful speech. Congratulations on the rally, to TAP and to all other participating groups and individuals.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 16/05/11 at 07:27 AM

The stinking dioxin belching pulp mill is not dead.

Gunns is a snake basking in the sun. When it has soaked up enough warmth from the blood, sweat and tears of Tasmanians it will crawl off to hide under a rock and wait until another gormless politician comes close enough to allow it to bite into public flesh again.

Cutting off the Gunns head did not kill the Gunns snake. Gunns just grew another just as venomous.

The stinking dioxin belching pulp mill will not be finished until Gunns move its location or drop it completely or go broke and Labor and Liberals officially oppose the stinking dioxin belching pulp mill.

The Greens have dropped their opposition to the stinking dioxin belching pulp mill in exchange for warm seats next to incumbent government and like Gunns can no longer be trusted.

Posted by Geoffrey on 16/05/11 at 07:44 AM

There must be a reason that businesses and governments want to make paper from a product that has to be given tax breaks to get planted, needs toxic chemicals to help it grow and needs chlorine bleaching in the process. Hemp would spread the wealth to rural areas, doesn’t need toxic chemicals and makes a better product. What is that reason?

Posted by Wining Pom on 16/05/11 at 07:58 AM

Thank you Bob, for those inspiring words. I start to feel a little safer here in our valley when I see how much has been achieved by our constant refusal.
Gunns may be in trouble as a company, or they may be lying doggo as Geoffrey #5 suggests. Either way, I won’t be sure the whole disaster is over until the corrupted PMAA has been repealed in its entirety, so that it can’t be used against us by anyone, not by Gunns nor any other company to whom they sell their permits, both State and Federal.
Only then will I feel that it is truly over.

Posted by Shirley Glen of West Tamar on 16/05/11 at 09:21 AM

Still as strong as ever.. keep saying it, you might be able to convince yourselves. You manage between 2,500-3,000 to a well publicised rally. Someone could probably tell us what percentage of the Launceston population that is. Not to mention the rally was not just an anti-pulp mill rally.

Posted by mary on 16/05/11 at 11:47 AM

#8.Which bit don’t you get? 6,500 attendees? The rally was about the price of bananas?
Michael Swanton.#8.Which bit don’t you get? 6,500 attendees?

Give us a break, Mary! (#8)
You don’t want to believe for one minute that the figure of “2500 - 3000” is accurate, coming as it does from the Exxagerator who are past masters at downplaying anything that might be detrimental to their beloved company (and conversely up-playing rally figures from the pro-mill lobby - who can forget the fantastic over-inflation by what-his-name McLean - you know who I mean - that CFMEU bloke - of 800 people to 11 000 at that infamous paid rally in Launceston a few years ago. Talk about numerically challenged!)
The official count for Saturday was 6500 - a fantastic effort for a rally organized on a shoestring in a place like Launceston. Don’t forget, that there were thousands more who couldn’t be there.
You really need to get out more, sweetheart!

Seems to me that the survey announced by the Examiner shows at worst, (‘worst’ in the sense of what the mill forebodes for Tasmania) that only 37% support the Tamar mill.

That leaves 63% of those surveyed who did not support the mill. Of these, as the survey shows, some were ambivalent (undecided) and some were categorical in their lack of support. After all these years, 37% is pretty weak, given, the manoeuvres etc that have come from institutional and vested interests in their vain attempts to con the public into supporting the mill.

Perhaps I missed it - do we know the actual wording of the questions? And who was the company, and what was the brief?

Even so, from what we know of the survey, we understand that the majority of those that had formed a view, were against the mill. It’s also reasonable to expect that if it came to a yes/no vote, an absolute majority of Tasmanians would express opposition to the mill. Perhaps Kevin Bonham could advise on what to expect from the large (23%) ‘undecided’ group amongst those surveyed. All things being equal and if ‘push came to shove’, I would expect the undecided group to split along the lines indicated by the 37-40% groups.

TO CONCLUDE:
The rally attendance is not indicative of minority opposition to the mill. It more likely indicates a ‘What mill?’ factor. Several years of empty promises, spurious assurances and yet - no mill. The rally was great. People there were happy, relaxed, but clearly dissatisfied with the betrayal of proper process and strongly supported Kim Booth when he spoke of using his vote in the Parliament to oppose any further assistance to Gunns.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 16/05/11 at 01:48 PM

Mary, the reason for the small attendance was that not all of us were paid to be there. I even had to make my own placard.

In addition to the 5000 or so full-time paid professional protesters (who have been demonstrating for any cause they get paid for ever since the Chartists of the 1840s), however, the attendance was pretty good considering that 99.9 per cent of Tamar Valley residents want the mill so badly that they are all chipping in their lifes’ savings to help build it.

Don’t you agree, mary, that fantasy worlds are great places to live in?

Posted by Justa Bloke on 16/05/11 at 03:39 PM

#11 The estimate of 2,500 attendees was provided by Tasmania Police… not the Examiner.
#10 How arrogant you are to believe you can just go around putting posters on property that does not belong to you and sticking signs up on the nature strip. Why don’t you put your signs up in supporters yards like everyone else?

Posted by Adam on 16/05/11 at 03:41 PM

Mary et al, an attendance of 6500, with a population the size of Tassie is actually statistically significant!

I would guess that everyone there could name at least two others who could not attend due to illness, sporting committments etc. Also, just have a look at the number of cars with anti-mill stickers on them. Social Psychology research indicates that if people are willing to put a sticker on their car (about anything) then it indicates a very strong belief, a passion about it, if you like. It is that strong belief, that passion, Mary that you just don’t understand. Try having that many, pro-mill people turn up on a Saturday, not paid, no free beer etc and see how you go…

Posted by bev on 16/05/11 at 04:22 PM

Re # 8 Mary,

Mary, When I saw the news on Saturday night (I can’t remember which station) they said 2,500 as well.

Roger

Posted by Roger on 16/05/11 at 04:45 PM

As well as the pulp mill, coal seam gas fracking may pop up on the agenda again. Fortunately, France has moved to ban fracking, although even it has been slightly amended in effect.

#19. Gosh Roger the ‘news’ could not have got it wrong, now could they? Michael Swanton.

Posted by Michael Swanton on 16/05/11 at 06:14 PM

#17. I think you will find the Extratrerristrial provided 2,500 and the police estimate was 3,000. You don’t want to provide us with your real name with views about poster placement? Michael Swanton.

Posted by Michael Swanton on 16/05/11 at 06:23 PM

#18 Yes, approximately 1.3% (based in the figure of 6,500 attendees) of the entire population of Tasmania attended this one event at Royal Park on Saturday. This is most definitely statistically significant, considering that the mainstream media did not provide even a fraction of the media coverage for this event given to, for instance, the build-up to a Hawthorn football match at York Park. This figure would equate to (conservatively)around 50,000 turning up to a rally in Melbourne. I don’t think we have had a single rally of proportionate size in Australia protesting against a government policy since the anti-Iraq war demonstrations in Melbourne and other capital cities.

And, of course, do not forget the 15,000 who marched and completely surrounded the Hobart CBD at the height of the pulp mill frenzy several years ago. Nothing really to compare this with on a proportionate basis anywhere in Australia in recent years that I am aware of.

Posted by John Alford on 16/05/11 at 06:47 PM

Regardless of what the polls or Examiner say, Tasmania’s proportional rate of native forest logging is the highest in the OECD. The stats are also clear that Tas logging is a consistent drain on the State’s economy.

Gunns’ woes have everything to do with global recognition that global warming is the mother of ecological catastrophes. As always, Tasmania lags behind the globe, leaving them wondering why Japan no longer wants to be seen having anything to do with smash-n-grabbers to their south.

Refusal may be our only weapon at the moment, but the Gunns share price suggests that global ecological imperatives are weighing into the battle.

John Hayward

Posted by john hayward on 16/05/11 at 07:27 PM

No 17. Please have a word on this subject to the RSPCA and the B & E bank. And, while you’re about it, another word to the various shops who also indulge and sundry political candidates.
I note that none of the above have had signs destroyed.
TAP’s signs were up for a maximum of four days. Only the pro mill groups would have taken offense to the extent of destroying them.

Posted by Mike Adams on 16/05/11 at 07:39 PM

Why do we give folks like mary (#8) the recognition he/she (‘cos you never can be sure online) craves by dignifying statements like theirs and those of their ilk with responses? Remove that recognition and we remove the ‘oxygen’ on which they thrive. Ignorance can be bliss.
On various other threads on TT, responses to these people have allowed them to hi-jack the intention of the original article. Just a thought.

Posted by Sid-n-e on 16/05/11 at 08:50 PM

Great article Bob.

Well done to all the volunteers that enabled the rally to occur.

Mary (#8), I wanted to attend the rally but couldn’t for various reasons. I know MANY others in the same situation. For every 1 person in attendance, there were probably 3 - 4 people that couldn’t be there. Even Gunns’ latest poll results show that still the majority of Tasmanians are against the mill.

l just wanted to advise all interested tappers of the pulp mill forum held recently at the grand chancellor hotel.The panel was John Pitt, Tony mcCall and a well credentialled economist from Sydney. To be brief John Pitt was espousing the benefits of the mill, what else is new!!!. Tony Mcall finally came out and said he was against the mill in the valley.hurrah!!
BUt wait, the economist stated that with 12 new mills being built in Indonesia, and 15 in China the projected life span of the mill here would be reduced down to 8 to 10 YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!
He further stated that with Gunns share price at about 52 cents(this was about a fortnight ago) and having a net debt of $650 MILLION!!!!!!!!, they would struggle to gain finance.
More to the point and l know l am preaching to the converted here!,can you imagine a world wide financial group pouring 2.3 BILLION dollars into a project with a life of TEN YEARS MAXIMUM ?it will not happen.
Unfortunately these enlightening facts were not reported in the examiner.Ted Sands

Posted by ted sands on 16/05/11 at 10:00 PM

Were any of our pro mill parliamentarians present, Ted?

Posted by Mike Adams on 17/05/11 at 08:00 AM

#28. The real breakdown!
-Sour grapes
-Tunnel vision
-Run of the mill
-Poisoning of fertile minds
-Demise of dinosaurs
-Flat earth principle
-Bankrupt-literally and morally
Would there be one person for each issue?
The biggest environmental disaster in Tasmania’s history? Yeah…. something like that!
Michael Swanton.

Posted by Michael Swanton on 17/05/11 at 08:49 AM

Re # 21 Michael

Michael,

I would trust the news more than the biased views of those who ran the rally. You yourself at comment number 9 use the figure 6,500, yet in comment 22 you acknowledge the police estimate was 3,000. I know which figures are more credible.

Roger

Posted by Roger on 17/05/11 at 08:51 AM

#32.Roger how quaint you are.The ‘news’ is a view. it is not the ‘truth’? Of course I acknowledge the police estimate,that is what they stated. That does not follow I agree with it’s accuracy.
Michael Swanton.

Posted by Michael Swanton on 17/05/11 at 09:23 AM

#31 I would say that the numbers for sour grapes and tunnel vision would be much higher than 1.

Posted by Baz on 17/05/11 at 09:53 AM

Thank you Baz #28 I did post a similar response, but surprise, surprise it ended up on the editors floor. Seems to me that some are protesting too much. I especially like the ones that respond that I would have loved to been there, but couldn’t make it. Shows how important the issue is to you then?

Posted by mary on 17/05/11 at 09:56 AM

#34. Is that affirmation or confirmation?
#35.That is why a pulp mill is not needed. Your so called postings won’t end up on the editors floor, as we have moved on from that need. Or didn’t you know? Michael Swanton.

Posted by Michael Swanton on 17/05/11 at 03:26 PM

29 # Ted. As you say with 12 new mills being built in Indonesia, and 15 in China and the competition with planed and built mills in South America the world will be awash with pulp. With the high Australian dollar and no tariff protection this mill would be losing money from day one and would have no hope of lasting even 8 years.

Gunns beset on several fronts
CARRIE LAFRENZ, AFR
17 May, 2011
ANY way you cut it, Gunns is up against it. The timber company is trying to execute two complex sales transactions while locking down a joint venture equity partner for its $2.3 billion pulp mill project in Bell Bay.

Meanwhile it is still facing community opposition to the project, which Gunns has been trying to get over the line for more than seven years, according to The Australian Financial Review .

Several thousand protesters marched through Launceston over the weekend as part of a rally against construction of the pulp mill. The Tasmanian Greens have said they would try to block the mill project in state parliament. The company is also facing a class action funded by IMF (Australia), and a disruption in Japanese orders following the earthquake and tsunami in that country.

While Gunns is focused on achieving its full-year guidance for underlying earnings before interest and tax of between $40 million and $50 million, it’s difficult to see how it will get there.

Woodchip shipments from Tasmania have faltered and the strong local dollar is making its product less competitive in the international market. While demand has increased from China, the key Japanese market remains volatile.

In March 2011, exports of hardwood chips from Tasmania rose slightly but were well behind the longer term monthly average. Shipments in March were made out of Bell Bay, with China and Taiwan accounting for 60 per cent.

Gunns chief executive Greg L’Estrange is caught between a rock and a hard place: he is trying to extract the most value out of the investment Gunns has made in the pulp mill and look after existing shareholders, but is also trying to be pragmatic in attracting a JV partner – all while under serious time constraints.

It is a remarkably thorough and well documented survey. My reservation (apart from the standard one of it being commissioned by a source with an interest in the issue) is that the question “Are you aware of the new Tasmanian Forest Agreement, which provides for a phasing out of logging in native forests?” comes before the pulp mill question. This may lead a respondent to believe that the TFA will certainly be implemented and that logging in native forests will certainly be phased out; whether these things are matters of fact remains to be seen. That information in a previous question could in turn have slightly skewed the pulp mill questions in favour of a positive response though probably not by more than a few points. It is hard to get these things completely perfect.

My view on the don’t-knows in this instance is that they are likely to be genuine don’t-knows, people unlikely to form any firm view of the issue unless pushed. Perhaps in a referendum type situation (not that one is likely to arise) they would be more likely to vote no out of sheer caution as uninformed voters often do.

Posted by Dr Kevin Bonham on 17/05/11 at 05:33 PM

Silly Billy quite willy nilly
how does her garden grow
with truthless barbs and baseless shards
a laryngytic crow

Phark ... phark….

While Wee willie winky (he’s stuffing up the town)
and the Board of Di-rec-tors do an Easter Island frown
and Humpty Dumpty doing dressups
for a part he’ll never play

We’ll rip the mill, we’ll kill the mill
We are here to stay.

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

By all the dark and evil joyns of Mordor,
In all the secret rooms
the harsh and loveless
tough and pitiless
hatch and scheme
... in gloom

Bravehearts and Gentle folk
Dreamers and the True
Lovers and Children
The Older and the New:

We saw one thing last Saturday
that millsters never do
We saw smiles, and greeted friends
had hugs, gave kisses
and laughed and smiled
while all the while
we marked the end
the final stage
its bitter end
the death struggle
of the mill.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 17/05/11 at 05:45 PM

I find all this debate on numbers quite interesting. I was in the march and there was a lady there counting heads as they passed. She appeared to me to be doing a very thorough job and taking a great deal of care to get an accurate count. I would suggest that her count would not be out by more than a hand full either way.
Now, we have a figure of 6500 put forward by TAP, who presumably organised the counting, and we have an estimate of 2500 - 3000 put forward by others.
Now, assuming that the lady I saw continued her diligent count, what exactly is the allegation here? She returned to TAP HQ and said “I counted 2656 people” and someone reckoned that wasn’t enough and added 4000 to it? Sorry, that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Firstly, it’d be a very stupid thing to do. TAP is not stupid or it wouldn’t have lasted this long. It’d only take one person involved in the conspiracy to have a change of heart.
Secondly I do not believe that there are many, if any, TAP members whose personal integrity would be so low. Most people in TAP are there to object about dishonesty and they are volunteering their time and money to do so.
The other option which is that the persons counting were fiddling the numbers is also unlikely. Once more than one person is doing a count, it’s impossible to fiddle unless the counters conspire to count double or something.
Far more likely that the estimates are dodgy. An estimate is just that and just because the estimate is by a police person or a journalist does not make it any more accurate.

Posted by Steve on 17/05/11 at 07:33 PM

Steve (#41): Yes, and I know the other counter, Jed O’Dogherty, and according to Bob MacMahon, Jed’s figure was within a handful of that which you mention, Steve. In Jed’s case, I have absolutely no reason to think that he would ever exaggerate, be careless with or misuse the truth. Given a bit of time, we will find some corroborative evidence.

What gives me the pip, is that when the pro-forestry march was held, departing from the same point, Scott MacLean said there was an audited figure of (I forget now exactly) some 9 or 10 thousand. Next day or so, John Gay had parlayed it up by another thousand or two.

However, using a photo that was supplied to me, and taken from up in Trevallyn, I was able to count each and every person in Royal Park (with some exceptions) and arrived at a total of some 928 persons (as I recall). I could be wrong, it might have been 927. That figure included ancillaries and anti-mill hecklers. I wrote to Scott Maclean about the discrepancy, including the photo, which showed the crowd divided into hundreds by placing red dots on the first hundred, pink on the next hundred and so on. He never replied. Personally, I would have thought that 2-3000 was more likely, but then, that’s only an uneducated guess. Maybe if I get some time, I’ll apply the same counting process to my photos of this rally.

You can’t argue with a body count.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 17/05/11 at 09:44 PM

Thanks for your reply Kevin Bonham (#39) which gave details of the survey commissioned by Gunns.
[http://www.gunns.com.au/Content/uploads/documents/Research Report.pdf]

I should note that:
1 The Examiner referred to the survey as showing results along the lines of ‘supported’, ‘opposed’ and ‘did not have an opinion either way’. This is a misrepresentation of the choices that respondents were given. In fact in a number of key questions, ‘neutral’ was slotted between support and oppose and a ‘don’t know/unsure included separately.
2 The section on survey findings, notes that the don’t know/unsure figures might be excluded from the calculations of the percentages. What seems clear, from looking at the actual questions in the appendix at the end of the document, is that it is incorrect for the Examiner to have characterised the ‘neutral’ responses as indicating not having an opinion either way.
3 The way that the survey allocated numbers (1-5) to represent strong opposition through to strong support for the mill with ‘neutral’ stuck in between is interesting. What is the validity of this sort of approach? Would it have improved the survey to have excluded the ‘neutral’ option? What are we entitled to draw from a ‘neutral’ response? That a person is unable to say something that might displease the questioner?
4 The questions on information sources seem to be designed for a follow up advertising campaign. (eg Magazines - specify, Websites - specify; etc)
5 I think I would have designed the questions differently, but do admit that I would have been biased in my approach. Is there a bias implicit in the type of questions that the survey asks? Who devised the questions?

CONCLUSION:
BEWARE: The purpose of the survey is given in the first line of the Executive Overview:

“This was the first stage of a community consultation project commissioned by Gunns Ltd and
comprised a telephone survey of Tasmanian householders to establish baseline indicators in
relation to key areas of interest.”

In other words, it’s not just a survey to wave in the face of Tappers, FTV and other locals, it’s something that will be used as evidence of consultation with the community, presumably in the pursuit of finance and FSC. Baseline indicators! How droll. Did they not some years ago pull out of the RPDC, thereby depriving us of certain environmental baseline indicators?

Posted by Garry Stannus on 17/05/11 at 11:17 PM

Yes in the table on page 10 of that report it can be seen that the great majority of those who are neither supporting or opposed responded as “neutral” rather than “don’t know”. I am sceptical that the ratio of genuine, informed neutrals compared to don’t knows is as high as the 11 to 1 ratio implied. People will say they are neutral rather than “don’t know” as it sounds less embarrassing and they feel like they are being more helpful by giving their answer this way. Of course there are genuine neutrals but I don’t think there would be quite that many.

Really describing the “neutral” respondents as neither for nor against is not too much of a misrepresentation. These respondents do not have an opinion that can be described as being one way or the other. The difference is between having a well-formed opinion that the matter is evenly balanced and not having a well-formed opinion. And as noted above I am sceptical of whether the former should be assumed for all those responding “neutral”.

The use of a continuum through strongly support to strongly oppose is common in surveys of attitudes to issues. Many other pollsters do the same. There is no problem with including a “neutral” option but it has to be interpreted cautiously.

I can’t see any evidence that the poll design would have given the respondents enough of a hint about the motives behind the survey to make them choose “neutral” to avoid displeasing the questioner. It was not mentioned at the start which side of the debate the survey was on behalf of.

I don’t detect any deliberate biasing in the survey design. As mentioned above the one thing I would have been more careful about is that since the pulp mill is the most important issue being surveyed, I would have asked the question about the pulp mill ahead of question 2a which provides potentially skewing (and debatable) information.

Posted by Dr Kevin Bonham on 18/05/11 at 12:52 PM

there is sufficient research using Rasch Analysis (Item Response Theory) to support what has been highlighted by Garry and Kevin, that a neutral response should not be assumed to represent an opinion between agree/support and disagree/unsupportinve etc. time limits any further input but i remember attending a seminar by Ass. Prof. Julie Pallant who presented (well) much of this research

Posted by joey on 18/05/11 at 02:55 PM

This bit of Bob McMahon’s speech took my breath away with its power and accuracy:

“I, and hundreds of others, saw them gathered on the steps of Parliament on that beautiful late summer day in March 2007. It was their building. They owned the parliament and scripted and directed what took place inside.”

And by the way, Mary doesn’t address stink or scandal. She just keeps jibing away to deflect from the destruction that she supports.

Posted by Bob Kendra on 18/05/11 at 05:04 PM

#46.Mary who Bob Kendra? Michael Swanton.

Posted by Michael Swanton on 18/05/11 at 05:48 PM

I don’t know why most post keep being edited and not posted. I have merely been stating that while Michael (#32) find my view quaint, I too find his view quaint as well considering he take the estimate of the people who organised the rally over that of the police. I would think that those who organised the rally have an incentive to over estimate the numbers.

The other issue I discussed was Michael’s acknowledgement of the police estimate (#22). I thought I would point out to him that his first comment (#9) did not mention the police estimate only the 6,500 figure. It was not until comment 22 that he mentions the police estimate and only after it had been brought up by someone else.

I think that 2,500-6,500 is still a low number considering all the advertising that went into the rally’s promotion, as well as the claims of groups like TAP about how hated the project is.

Roger

Posted by Roger on 19/05/11 at 08:33 AM

Has Australia had any other enormously suspicious advent, (but pushed through anyway by our government,) as was this particular situation, whereby the whole intended proposal was to benefit but a small bunch of company directors and some institutional investors investing in a bum steer of a company?

All of the ongoing support throughout and toward this dumb as dog-shit pulp-Mill, (as has been given by the various State and Federal government ministers,) has been to “add even more wrongs in the hope that it may turn out as a right”?

Were it not for the original discussion and drawing or whatever, as may have been depicted on the back of a beer-coaster, along with the enthusiasm of 2 Gunns Ltd directors, John Gay and Robin Grey, then add the the support of our one-time non-elected State Premier, then you have the central characters who concepted this entire dubious plot.

Now then we have all since been witness to the huge mountain of supportive actions by both the Tasmanian State Labor government ministers and State Liberal government ministers, and of course the Federal Liberal government ministers of J W (Fibber) Howard, whom were at that time of the hatching of this dubious plot, our Australian government leaders.

What a torturing deceitful path that has since occurred from that original time, which has of now been so frantically and desperately trodden down upon?
What now of the crowning ideals of truth honesty and justice?

Posted by William Boeder on 19/05/11 at 12:06 PM

#48.I am rather ‘bemused’ by your attempt at entrapment. For the record I am more inclined to err on the side of the estimations by the attendees, given their consideration of scientific approximation, rather than under-estimation either from a cynic or a crowd control representative. The belief that the attendees physically counted, with a counter, rather than roughly estimate is my basis for that conclusion. Michael Swanton.

Posted by Michael Swanton. on 19/05/11 at 04:35 PM

Robin Gray, worst premier Tasmania ever had according to a very well respected economist, goes on the board of Gunns and where is Gunns now? An ex Liberal premier advising people to vote Labor!!!!! And it took a Labor/Green accord to get us out of the very serious mess he got us into. The fact is, he almost cost us statehood we were that much in debt. But, we have a Lib/Lab coalition for the pulp mill. I guess Gunns still have a little money to throw around.

Posted by Wining Pom on 19/05/11 at 10:11 PM

48; Roger/Mary, What are you alleging, deliberate fraud on the part of TAP? They did a physical count. No estimate involved. If you reckon they’ve deliberately altered the results of their count, come out and say it. No weasel words.
By the way, I’m not so sure about your statement about “all the advertising that went into the rally’s promotion”. I rang my mother on the morning of the rally to find out if she’d like a lift and she didn’t even know it was happening! The advertising was quite minimal really.

Posted by Steve on 19/05/11 at 10:26 PM

Well Steve (#52) I think I said I’d try and apply my counting technique, used to establish attendance at that pro mill rally, to find out how many were at this anti-mill rally and march. (#42) If you or anyone else, for that matter, would like my results, and the pix and work that went with it, you can get them from me via .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

It was a great rally. Personally, the attendance wasn’t an issue. Mary somewhere made a valid point that pro-mill rallies will always be smaller, because people don’t demonstrate for what’s been agreed to, they demonstrate against. That doesn’t mean that I accept ‘her’ general position , quite obviously I don’t. on another matter, I’m interested in the comments that she and others from the pro mill side claim to have been kept from publication. They are free to forward any such comments to me, or better still, why not resubmit them as ‘the fish that John West reject’ and see if they’ll get up on the second go. On a related matter, just as Mary suggested why pro-mill rallies will be smaller, so too might I suggest that most people now think the mill is not going to happen, and the need to demonstrate against it is no longer there?

I was struck by the general happiness of the crowd at the rally. My apologies to the cameraman who got a bit grumpy with me because I stood in front of him on more than one occasion (without realising). It was a beaut crowd and well organised. Bob’s speech was a rattler! The march was a real family affair. I saw grandparents marching with their children and grandchildren, I saw mums with pushers throughout the throng. I saw young men and old. In wheelchairs and on foot. People singing as they walked (‘march’ doesn’t quite convey the way the throng moved. Some played accoustic instruments, along the way. It was happy. And then, how we ended at Civic Square, where various people were holding a ‘Fair Trade’ event, with stalls selling ‘Fair Trade’ goods or providing information. I think it was truly one of the nicest rallies I’ve ever been on. And that band of youngsters, played very well, their music was just great.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 18/06/11 at 12:00 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before you submit your comment, please make sure that it complies with Tasmanian Times Code of Conduct.